2 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine: 2 That the aged men be csober, grave, temperate, fsound in faith, in charity, in patience. 3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not ifalse accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be lsober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be ediscreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed

Is there not to be bible studies lead by women for women in Reformed churches?

Click to expand...

Anne,
MY church has them. My wife attends one from time to time. I believe there is a place for women to gather and discuss God's word and feminine things that men should not be a part of. However, I believe the study should be under the oversight of the elders and there should be curriculum provided.

Anne,
MY church has them. My wife attends one from time to time. I believe there is a place for women to gather and discuss God's word and feminine things that men should not be a part of. However, I believe the study should be under the oversight of the elders and there should be curriculum provided.

Click to expand...

I agree, and this is what these ladies are doing as well, saying that they will be under the authority of their church's leadership.

2 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine: 2 That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience. 3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed

My current understanding is that women are to teach (train is the word in some translations) younger women to do all those things, and that having no warrant from Scripture to do so, women shouldn’t formally teach doctrinal things to any adult, except as pertaining to the training they’re instructed to do. That said...what am I doing debating doctrinal issues on this board? I often feel uncomfortable about it, to be honest.

My current understanding is that women are to teach (train is the word in some translations) younger women to do all those things, and that having no warrant from Scripture to do so, women shouldn’t formally teach doctrinal things to any adult, except as pertaining to the training they’re instructed to do. That said...what am I doing debating doctrinal issues on this board? I often feel uncomfortable about it, to be honest.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Oh, bless your heart, Jeri. I have learned so much from you and other very well read Reformed women.

What if the best book on a topic is written by a woman? Am I supposed to shun it? Are we going to parse this rubric and bring any and every possible venue for imparting spiritual knowledge under universal direction from a command given for a certain (worship) context? Can I learn in good conscience from Jeri?

We don't want to be any less strict than the Bible. Nor, any more strict. The problems liberals have is really not with the fuzzy stuff, but the clear stuff. So, let's draw the hard-line on the clear stuff and defend it with rigor.

When we apply a stricture focused on women-and-church-office to everything, we're just defending male dominance with a Christian prooftext. When we say (with Paul) women may not be preachers, we are making a declaration not definitional of MEN but definitional of CHRISTIAN PREACHING. That it is DIFFERENT; it's not "teaching" per se (though it necessarily involves that work); it is divine authority on display, a presentation that does not have the same degree in any other context outside formal worship and formal evangelism.

And because we place a premium on the preaching-teaching function, we don't have to treat any and every other exercise of teaching, writing a book, giving counsel, etc. in the same way. In fact, we shouldn't. The rules we follow for other plans should be guided by wisdom and prudence and a biblical mind. The rules for office and for preaching are different, and it sets such things apart.

Conscience, don't forget that. If a man feels wrong sitting in a S.S. class or a Bible Study led by a qualified woman (who is acting under the church's rightly ordered supervision), then he ought to skip it. Another man who doesn't feel that way finds a seat, and no one stops the class 'til he leaves. "To his own master he stands or falls."

The only way the hard-line fails is when the cheats succeed in undermining confidence in the plain words of Paul. When they try to leverage some "gift" into a reason to overthrow the simplicity of Christ, and soft-hearted/headed persons surrender. That's the very game that some were attempting in Corinth; and Paul shut them down.

To make the truth work, just focus on the truth and it's innate authority. And stick to the hard-line.

I'll add this, on the subject of ministerial training. The vast majority of this should be by the efforts of other ministers. 2Tim.2:2, simple.

[3] Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, [4] and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, [5] to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled. (ESV)

Women in this passage are commanded to teach in an appropriate context. Unless we have a specific reason to believe that the seminar is teaching an unbiblical position on women teaching, we should not jump to the conclusion that it is out of order.

I think about Numbers 11

Numbers 11:26–30

[26] Now two men remained in the camp, one named Eldad, and the other named Medad, and the Spirit rested on them. They were among those registered, but they had not gone out to the tent, and so they prophesied in the camp. [27] And a young man ran and told Moses, “Eldad and Medad are prophesying in the camp.” [28] And Joshua the son of Nun, the assistant of Moses from his youth, said, “My lord Moses, stop them.” [29] But Moses said to him, “Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all the LORD's people were prophets, that the LORD would put his Spirit on them!” [30] And Moses and the elders of Israel returned to the camp. (ESV)

In this passage, Joshua was concerned about what it might imply if Moses had others who prophesied as a result of the Spirit's activity as if to say that if there were other prophets, maybe they would have no reason to follow Moses. Moses corrected him perfectly: it is always better for the Spirit to be at work in people. Joshua was not a bad guy by any stretch and he had very good intentions in bringing this up. Only a few chapters later, Korah would lead the people in a rebellion against God by rebelling against Moses. Yet Moses was discerning. He did not consider the activity of the Spirit in others to be threatening the way that direct rebellion is threatening.

Likewise, if women are actively seeking and learning the doctrine of the faith in order to teach others I am thrilled. I am not concerned about those who are passionate about the Bible and spreading biblical doctrine. I am far more concerned with usurpers who put themselves first, like Korah and women who exalt themselves to the eldership contrary to the commandment.

The problem I see with women teaching a class or study in a church, even when under the authority of the elders and especially if men are present in her class is that they’ll view her as an authority on biblical matters. The pattern is for women to ask their husbands at home if they don’t understand anything (1 Corinthians 14:35). But then here’s this woman at the church who can answer my question much better.

Women teaching on doctrinal things, besides the specific things of Titus 2, seems without basis. I guess I’m applying the RPW to this- looking for a command from the Lord, and Titus 2 seems to be it.

The context of the Titus 2 passage is primarily focused on godly behavior and good works, but there is no text-based reason for drawing a dichotomy between teaching works and teaching "sound doctrine" in general.

It makes for an awkward application. Women are to learn sound doctrine in church then apply sound doctrine at home and teach other women to apply sound doctrine, but (in this view) ONLY the stuff that pertains to managing a godly and self-controlled household, deferring everything more "theological" to the elders? I just think about what actual woman-to-woman ministry looks like when it is working well. Your theological foundations drive your actions. A woman who is training a younger woman in "godliness with contentment" for example should not feel the need to avoid the doctrine of divine providence lest she accidentally become a teacher. How are women to teach other women to follow the examples of Titus 2 without allowing them to expound on the doctrinal foundations that make them possible? If the objective is that "the word of God not be reviled" (v. 5) then are women to train woman in these works without the word of God?

The context of the Titus 2 passage is primarily focused on godly behavior and good works, but there is no text-based reason for drawing a dichotomy between teaching works and teaching "sound doctrine" in general.

It makes for an awkward application. Women are to learn sound doctrine in church then apply sound doctrine at home and teach other women to apply sound doctrine, but (in this view) ONLY the stuff that pertains to managing a godly and self-controlled household, deferring everything more "theological" to the elders? I just think about what actual woman-to-woman ministry looks like when it is working well. Your theological foundations drive your actions. A woman who is training a younger woman in "godliness with contentment" for example should not feel the need to avoid the doctrine of divine providence lest she accidentally become a teacher. How are women to teach other women to follow the examples of Titus 2 without allowing them to expound on the doctrinal foundations that make them possible? If the objective is that "the word of God not be reviled" (v. 5) then are women to train woman in these works without the word of God?

Click to expand...

I think that theology and doctrine certainly come into the picture, always, if helping women with practical matters like loving their husbands and children and managing their households. The purpose of the training is ultimately so that in these young women’s lives the gospel, the doctrine won’t be maligned through their behavior or neglect or ignorance. But I see women sitting down to teach on purely doctrinal issues, where the focus isn’t on Titus 2 issues but is on some same biblical issue an elder might be teaching. That’s where I have a problem.

[sound of toe stepping into water very carefully] Three comments:
(1) just because someone is a man, does not mean he should be teaching in church. In my observation the vast majority of men have no place teaching doctrine in Church, even if it is their duty to teach their family. I fear most are not qualified, while obligated, to even teach their families. Older men need to do this, not 30 something 'trained' women.

(2) there is a screaming need for godly women to teach women how to be godly women. Men, no matter how 'qualified' cannot do this, nor should they do it. If older women would take this charge seriously and skip the lapsarian studies, the church and families would be much stronger. It may be my poor eyesight, but most of the women in the photo appear to be fairly young. So I think the meeting is probably fraught with residual problems down the road: young women, feeling empowered and full of pride by their new found education, launching out to teach other women. Ultimately this is the feminism train wreck in a church context. They will eventually be teaching about the sin of a male-dominated church, and arguing for gun control (sic).

(3) my observations of the women teacher leaders roaming around is anything but positive. There seems to be an inordinate drift toward pride, mysticism, spiritualism, herbal/scent spiritual therapy stuff, and emotionalism. N.B. Not to say there aren't also Benny Hinn's and Olstein's too.

If we see women in the church praying rigorously for their families, their husbands, other families. If we see women taking seriously the calling to care for the home and the children, if we see women taking seriously mercy ministries with younger women/mothers, shut-ins, widows, etc. We will see the Holy Spirit's working in the body of Christ in far greater measure than classrooms of women teaching other women the five solas. [sound of toe leaving the water and making a hasty exit]

Hehe. All that you describe is what I’ve seen as well. When we go beyond what God has described we soon taste the bitter fruit of it. I’m hesitant to contradict Rev. Buchanan- maybe I’m not clear on what he is commending, I’d like to understand that better. Anyway, thanks for dipping your toe in.

I have zero problem with learning from women in casual conversation, or reading books they've written (Karen Jobes, for instance, is an insightful and careful commentator, as was Joyce Baldwin and some others I could mention). This is no different from Priscilla and Aquila explaining to Apollos the way more correctly. Of course, historical narrative cannot simply be taken as imperative without qualification. However, there seem to be no problems mentioned with Priscilla's part in that endeavor. So, in this area, I agree with Bruce. I would never teach on homosexuality, for instance, without utilizing Rosaria Butterfield. There is no one who has said it better, even if Gagnon has the careful exegetical study.

That being said, I do also see a trend that disturbs me about women's conferences. First of all, they are often about empowering women, either more or less subtlely in a feminist direction. It doesn't take too many of these before they are taking women out of the home and instructing them to do almost the exact opposite of what Titus 2 says. All too often, the ladies go to these conferences, commanding their husbands to pick up all the slack at home without so much as a please. I am at a loss to know how this is edifying to the body of Christ.

Share This Page

About us

The Puritan Board is a forum dedicated to the discussion of Christian theology in a Confessionally Reformed context. We are dedicated to our historic Creeds and Confessions because we believe they are faithful to the Scriptures.